BRIAN L001
They never started any war? You should read some serious book and not zionist mythology.
They started hitting the innocent in 1947 and they have continued ever since, "to teach them a lesson"They do not seem to earn any lesson. And DO YOU???????????

"A South Korean military official also said that to prepare for this possibility, the military was examining ways to neutralize North Korea’s long-range artillery concentrated along the western sector of the front line.

North Korea reportedly has about 10,000 artillery pieces deployed near the DMZ. Of these, about 200 are 170mm self-propelled artillery and 200 are 240mm multiple rocket launchers deployed in the western sector, with ranges far enough to hit the greater Seoul area. The maximum range of the 240mm multiple rocket launcher is 60km, while the long-range guns can hit northern Gyeonggi Province, all of Seoul, Gwacheon, Anyang and Siheung."

The Economist article “Smoke with Fire”, published on November 23rd 2010, discusses the recent conflict between North Korea and South Korea. North Korea bombarded South Korean territory around 2:30 on November 23rd. I chose this article because it provides a great snapshot of the initial reaction to the bombings. We can analyze this situation through a liberal and realist view, within the context of rationality. Another important detail we can analyze is not only the reaction of North Korea and South Korea, but also the reaction of bigger and more influential states, such as the United States of America and China.

North Korea is going through a transition period within its leadership. Kim Jong Il is eventually going to hand his throne to his son, Kim Jung Un. We can assume, like any change in leadership in a state, that domestic politics will be involved. Some observers believe that these attacks on South Korea could be due to this successor, as a result from internal politics. Possibly Kim Jung Un needed to demonstrate his ability to take military action against South Korea.

If we view this from a liberal theoretical standpoint, we could argue that there is logic behind North Korea’s attacks, like domestic politics. But from a realist standpoint, nobody will ever be able to truly pinpoint the intent for North Korea’s military action, which will only heighten the security dilemma. In the article, South Korea’s foreign ministry stated “Nobody knows exactly what they (the North Korean government) are thinking, but a return to six party talks could be part of it.” In a realist perspective, actors are irrational, and essentially can take action without reason, only increasing the international anarchy. A realist could also argue that conflict between North Korea and South Korea could be a result each country trying to be more powerful than each other. But, if we look at this scenario through a liberal perspective, where characters can be presumed rational, and that North Korea does have some rational thought to its military decisions, whether they be due to domestic politics or to pressure South Korea.

According to this article, China has been relatively quiet on the issue. The articles states that “ a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman had merely expressed “concern” for the conflict. This could unfold into some larger conflict between North Korea and China, as China might want North Korea to be less aggressive with South Korea. North Korea getting into a full-scale with South Korea would only put more tension on China to get involved. If China desires to maintain the status quo, or purse a defensive realist policy, it should encourage North Korea to not provoke South Korea.

While many are downplaying the attacks, which have become customary to Korean culture, the hostilities have become the “hot” topic in American media. The attacks between both countries have been constant headlines for the past week. As an audience of the American media, this makes me wonder how biased or truthful the information is. While Americans are panicking, South Koreans are accepting the attacks as part of normalcy.

Overall, this scenario influences me to be more of a realist, because I truly believe that no state can actually knows North Korea’s actual intensions; and North Korea, not being a liberal state, can take any military action because of the dictatorial powers its leaders have.

The Economist article “Smoke with Fire”, published on November 23rd 2010, discusses the recent conflict between North Korea and South Korea. North Korea bombarded South Korean territory around 2:30 on November 23rd. I chose this article because it provides a great snapshot of the initial reaction to the bombings. We can analyze this situation through a liberal and realist view, within the context of rationality. Another important detail we can analyze is not only the reaction of North Korea and South Korea, but also the reaction of bigger and more influential states, such as the United States of America and China.

North Korea is going through a transition period within its leadership. Kim Jong Il is eventually going to hand his throne to his son, Kim Jung Un. We can assume, like any change in leadership in a state, that domestic politics will be involved. Some observers believe that these attacks on South Korea could be due to this successor, as a result from internal politics. Possibly Kim Jung Un needed to demonstrate his ability to take military action against South Korea.

If we view this from a liberal theoretical standpoint, we could argue that there is logic behind North Korea’s attacks, like domestic politics. But from a realist standpoint, nobody will ever be able to truly pinpoint the intent for North Korea’s military action, which will only heighten the security dilemma. In the article, South Korea’s foreign ministry stated “Nobody knows exactly what they (the North Korean government) are thinking, but a return to six party talks could be part of it.” In a realist perspective, actors are irrational, and essentially can take action without reason, only increasing the international anarchy. A realist could also argue that conflict between North Korea and South Korea could be a result each country trying to be more powerful than each other. But, if we look at this scenario through a liberal perspective, where characters can be presumed rational, and that North Korea does have some rational thought to its military decisions, whether they be due to domestic politics or to pressure South Korea.

According to this article, China has been relatively quiet on the issue. The articles states that “ a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman had merely expressed “concern” for the conflict. This could unfold into some larger conflict between North Korea and China, as China might want North Korea to be less aggressive with South Korea. North Korea getting into a full-scale with South Korea would only put more tension on China to get involved. If China desires to maintain the status quo, or purse a defensive realist policy, it should encourage North Korea to not provoke South Korea.

While many are downplaying the attacks, which have become customary to Korean culture, the hostilities have become the “hot” topic in American media. The attacks between both countries have been constant headlines for the past week. As an audience of the American media, this makes me wonder how biased or truthful the information is. While Americans are panicking, South Koreans are accepting the attacks as part of normalcy.

Overall, this scenario influences me to be more of a realist, because I truly believe that no state can actually knows North Korea’s actual intensions; and North Korea, not being a liberal state, can take any military action because of the dictatorial powers its leaders have.

"South Korea's rival ideological camps are unequivocal in condemning North Korea's recent deadly attacks on a southern island and calling for stern countermeasures against further provocations by the communist state, a presidential panel said in a report Friday."

Leave the ordinary Nokos alone to live their peaceful hermetic lives. The Hegemon has done enough damage to many people especially the Ummah who now have to live in insecurities and no rule of laws like in Somalia, Haiti, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan etc. Even though the Kim rulers are autocratic, given time they will change if the foreign devils will allow their own pace of evolution to the Nokos brand of democracy and development if the Hegemon stops the threatening actions and noises.

"The Ministry of National Defense and the National Intelligence Service did not prepare for North Korea’s attack on Yeonpyeong Island last week, even though they were aware of signs of it months beforehand.

The NIS had intercepted orders from North Korea to shell western border islands, including Yeonpyeong, through secret surveillance in August, three months before the attack, Choi Jae-sung, a member of the National Assembly’s Intelligence Committee, said on Wednesday."

Dec 1st 2010 8:10 GMT
@devil's advocate 2
Nuking South Korea is a very bad sarcasm, because nuked South Korea is actually going to hurt the Japanese Economy in a BIG way, so it is definitely NOT in Japanese interests for that to happen....]

OK...OK! Bad sarcasm it is! It is nevertheless a just sarcastic comment of mine. I didn't mean that it will happen.

""Have you read WikiLeaks about the Chinese leaders' opinion on the Kims?

Just before this particular leak came out, I made the same point. China does not want to give more because it is tired of the Kims as well."

The cables took place in early 2009. Secondly, the Chinese Communist Party does not handle North Korea through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Those wikileaks were either PLA or people from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in China. The main conduit to North Korea for China is Communist Party's International Liaison Department. Do you know what that is for? It handles relations with other Communist Parties around the world. Last time I heard the People Republic of China and the Democratic People's Republic Of Korea ruling party were Communist. You need to read more about Communism.

"Analysts said that the more derogatory comments were probably made by foreign ministry officials, who are less hard-line - and wield less power - than the officials from the Communist Party's International Liaison Department who actually control China's North Korea policy."

The article explains in more detail that the PRC is going to back Kim Jong Un.

1) Chinese exports to North Korea rose nearly 30 percent, according to Chinese customs statistics.
2) Chinese Politburo member Zhou Yongkang had a front row seat presiding over a military parade where Kim Jong Il's son and designated successor made his public debut. The food and funds for the parade all came from CPC coffers.
3) Kim Jong Il sent wreath to Mao Anying grave a couple days ago for 60th Anniversary of the Korean War.

The Chinese government has made the decision to pump more money into the DPRK to prop it up at least for the next 5-6 years. The way I see it, the Chinese tax payers are propping up Kim Jong Un. It's a good move by China. Kim Jong Un will not fall, because Beijing will ensure that he will not fall.

"Such conversions have been successfully done before. Maybe, the North Koreans should take a leaf form it-- With or without more financial input from China."

They already are doing that. Weapons sales, counterfeiting and growing opium and making heroin. Chinese traders in the border range know that North Koreans are producing heroin and smuggling it into China.

There will a lot more of this if North Korea decides to open up its economy.

If the ordinary Chinese were to know that the China funds a regime that produce and sells heroin in China I wonder what they will say. Chinese people always complain about the British forcing Opium on to the Chinese, but not a word is said about the DPRK and its drug dealing activities.

I just think you are clutching at straws and naive hope.

1) The DPRK can't feed itself. That problem has to be solved. Again this is where China / Russia are important. The key to getting North Korea agriculture up and running is fuel supplies. Subsidized initially.

2) Sanctions prevent it from exporting or importing much. Even if it could, it needs foreign currency to buy fuel.
3) Most factories have been stripped clean of anything of value.

4) It can export its mineral wealth. However, mines are in horrible shape. North Korea has vast mineral wealth. If it can rehabilitate the mines and setup new ones then it has a chance. Mining is not like light industry / agriculture it needs large amounts of capital. The problem it lacks the capital and expertise.

This is where China comes into play. China has capital and expertise. The DPRK state run companies don't have the capital and access to markets. Capitalism is fine for the DPRK when they are collecting all the profits and not having to cough up the investment. The Chinese companies have invested in North Korea before and the North Koreans just "nationalize" it once the operation is running and profitable. But eventually the operation dies, because they lack access to markets because of sanctions.

Given that Kim Jung Un has decided to embrace "Military First" at least for now, I don't see he has any movement toward reforming the economy. For Capitalism to be successful there has to be some dispersion of economic power Iie competition)

What's wrong with China pumping money into the DPRK economy at least to stablize it and help with reform. I get the impression that you think China did everything by itself in the 1980s. If it did what was the point of opening up. The point of opening up was because it realized that it could not do everything by itself. Without western markets where would China be today? The World Bank, Japan and the West provided China with loans, grants for many infrastructure projects in the 1980s and some of the funding is still in place.]

Have you read WikiLeaks about the Chinese leaders' opinion on the Kims?

Just before this particular leak came out, I made the same point. China does not want to give more because it is tired of the Kims as well.

"Such conversions have been successfully done before. Maybe, the North Koreans should take a leaf form it-- With or without more financial input from China."

They already are doing that. Weapons sales, counterfeiting and growing opium and making heroin. Chinese traders in the border range know that North Koreans are producing heroin and smuggling it into China.

There will a lot more of this if North Korea decides to open up its economy.

If the ordinary Chinese were to know that the China funds a regime that produce and sells heroin in China I wonder what they will say. Chinese people always complain about the British forcing Opium on to the Chinese, but not a word is said about the DPRK and its drug dealing activities.

I just think you are clutching at straws and naive hope.

1) The DPRK can't feed itself. That problem has to be solved. Again this is where China / Russia are important. The key to getting North Korea agriculture up and running is fuel supplies. Subsidized initially.

2) Sanctions prevent it from exporting or importing much. Even if it could, it needs foreign currency to buy fuel.
3) Most factories have been stripped clean of anything of value.

4) It can export its mineral wealth. However, mines are in horrible shape. North Korea has vast mineral wealth. If it can rehabilitate the mines and setup new ones then it has a chance. Mining is not like light industry / agriculture it needs large amounts of capital. The problem it lacks the capital and expertise.

This is where China comes into play. China has capital and expertise. The DPRK state run companies don't have the capital and access to markets. Capitalism is fine for the DPRK when they are collecting all the profits and not having to cough up the investment. The Chinese companies have invested in North Korea before and the North Koreans just "nationalize" it once the operation is running and profitable. But eventually the operation dies, because they lack access to markets because of sanctions.

Given that Kim Jung Un has decided to embrace "Military First" at least for now, I don't see he has any movement toward reforming the economy. For Capitalism to be successful there has to be some dispersion of economic power Iie competition)

What's wrong with China pumping money into the DPRK economy at least to stablize it and help with reform. I get the impression that you think China did everything by itself in the 1980s. If it did what was the point of opening up. The point of opening up was because it realized that it could not do everything by itself. Without western markets where would China be today? The World Bank, Japan and the West provided China with loans, grants for many infrastructure projects in the 1980s and some of the funding is still in place.]

Have you read WikiLeaks about the Chinese leaders' opinion on the Kims?

Just before this particular leak came out, I made the same point. China does not want to give more because it is tired of the Kims as well.

Wikileads finally reveal the truth that the rogue elephant is the Hegemon with its hungry baby Soko Lee Myunk Bak. The Nokos are actually behaving quite rationally like any poor farmer protecting the crops in his field by firing his blunder-blast to chase them away.

"Such conversions have been successfully done before. Maybe, the North Koreans should take a leaf form it-- With or without more financial input from China."

They already are doing that. Weapons sales, counterfeiting and growing opium and making heroin. Chinese traders in the border range know that North Koreans are producing heroin and smuggling it into China.

There will a lot more of this if North Korea decides to open up its economy.

If the ordinary Chinese were to know that the China funds a regime that produce and sells heroin in China I wonder what they will say. Chinese people always complain about the British forcing Opium on to the Chinese, but not a word is said about the DPRK and its drug dealing activities.

I just think you are clutching at straws and naive hope.

1) The DPRK can't feed itself. That problem has to be solved. Again this is where China / Russia are important. The key to getting North Korea agriculture up and running is fuel supplies. Subsidized initially.
2) Sanctions prevent it from exporting or importing much. Even if it could, it needs foreign currency to buy fuel.
3) Most factories have been stripped clean of anything of value.
4) It can export its mineral wealth. However, mines are in horrible shape. North Korea has vast mineral wealth. If it can rehabilitate the mines and setup new ones then it has a chance. Mining is not like light industry / agriculture it needs large amounts of capital. The problem it lacks the capital and expertise.

This is where China comes into play. China has capital and expertise. The DPRK state run companies don't have the capital and access to markets. Capitalism is fine for the DPRK when they are collecting all the profits and not having to cough up the investment. The Chinese companies have invested in North Korea before and the North Koreans just "nationalize" it once the operation is running and profitable. But eventually the operation dies, because they lack access to markets because of sanctions.

Given that Kim Jung Un has decided to embrace "Military First" at least for now, I don't see he has any movement toward reforming the economy. For Capitalism to be successful there has to be some dispersion of economic power Iie competition)

What's wrong with China pumping money into the DPRK economy at least to stablize it and help with reform. I get the impression that you think China did everything by itself in the 1980s. If it did what was the point of opening up. The point of opening up was because it realized that it could not do everything by itself. Without western markets where would China be today? The World Bank, Japan and the West provided China with loans, grants for many infrastructure projects in the 1980s and some of the funding is still in place.

The Americans will chicken out against North Korea and China.
If China does not bring a solution, South Korea is a lost case.
The Japanese know already that the US are always chicken out when it really gets risky for them.
In Europe we could see that the US always were drawing in their horns as soon as the victorious Red Army showed up.
I just remember Hungary, Tchechoslovakia, Berlin Wall.
They will draw in their horns also in Korea.
Germany can be grateful that they have now the Russian nation as their real friend.

"Whether they Kims, especially this new Kim, has/will have enough political clout to push through an economic reform is a valid question. Actually, I read in the Western press in the late 1970's saying that Deng would not be able to keep a firm hand on China as Mao or Zhou did before him "because he lacked the power base the other two had". I seem to remember reading similar things about Kim Jong Il right after he took over from his father too. History has proved the skeptics wrong."

The difference is the guy is only 27, and is facing a far more hostile environment than Deng Xiaoping and his father did. Internally he does not have the connections that Deng Xiaoping had in the military or the time to build them up like his Father.

"That NK is spending 35% of its GDP on the military means that if portions of the money can be released for the purpose of economic growth, NK could do better than China did in the corresponding period of its reform that never came"

I think its optimistic. I make a comparison between Eastern Europe and Russia. Both implemented shock therapy. The Eastern Europeans did OK, Russia not so much. A lot of it has to do with the level of military spending in USSR. The Russians cut back on the military, and the Generals first response was to launch a coup. This is where Chinese aid is critical for Kim Jong Un. The Chinese give him enough money so he maintain military spending so he placate the Generals. Then he can spend the resources he has to develop the economy. Once some State Owned companies are doing OK, then he can parachute some Generals in as CEO like Burma is doing now.

Another reason why the Russians did not do as well as the Chinese/Eastern Europeans is the time they spent under Communism. The Russians had Communism for more than 70 years. China had a centralized economy for 30 years before reforms started. People in China over 45 had experience in a market economy. Some Chinese economist had Western education or had been educated when China was still capitalist. If they were 55-65 in 1979, they would have been in 25-35 in 1949.]

Interesting point! I remember that "military to civilian conversion" was one of the early reforms China undertook. The generals turned into businessmen and ran manufacturing, real estate, hotel chain and other business empires. Because of their military connection, they became so successful that the real civilian complained. The Chinese government had to order the military to give up their business sector and go back to being soldiers. Fortunately, China by then was rich enough to spend more on the military.

Such conversions have been successfully done before. Maybe, the North Koreans should take a leaf form it-- With or without more financial input from China.

Nov 29th 2010 3:53 GMT
Lets look at the evidence - N Korea torpedoes S. Korean shiplast month, killing 40+ sailors, and as a result China warns the US and S. Korea about bringing in aircraft carrier in to the Yellow sea and there is no condemnation of Pyongyang.

Then last week N Korea opens up deadly artillery fire on S. Korean island killing and injuring dozens of civilians and again, China dutifully warns the US and S. Korea about their aggressive war games in the international waters off the Korean peninsula. And of-course there is no condemnation of the communist regime.

Also, consider the new revelation from the wikileaks that China did not stop nuclear materials on N Korean airplane headed for Iran, that stopped and refueled in China.

If one denies that China and it's troublesome proxies - N Korea, Pakistan and Myanmar are not an emerging force of evil in the modern world, then they are in complete and utter denial of reality on the ground. Please note, that evil loves weakness as it has correctly diagnosed in president Obama. One can expect to be pushed around by this evil nexus for the next two years till our collective backs are up against the proverbial wall.

South Korea will need to show some pluck here and be more independent and be willing to risk more aggressive action without the complete and explicit US approval. It will need to do this, if it would like to cut this menace off in the early stages before the cost of inaction rises to horrific proportions.

Good luck to us all and God bless.]

Now is the time for India to prove that it is a real "Emerged Power". Send an army to Korea and show the world how to put the evil China in its place and then do a "Song-and-dance" routine with the old US of A afterwards.

Nov 30th 2010 4:44 GMT
@Devil's Advocate 2
>"perform a low-orbit saturation attack on North Korea "
>
>And then do the same to South Korea. THAT would suit Japan's interest even better!

What are you smoking today? The US performing nuclear attacks on its ALLY? That pushes bounds of sanity, even for the Tea-Partiers..

Anyway, as far as I know, South Korea has no nuclear (or radioactive) waepons pointed and aimed at our cities unlike North Korea. I call for the North's nuclear eradication merely because it is the only way to guarantee that there will be no indiscriminate attack by the North on either South Korea or Japan in the event of a "Regime Change".]